-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Could technology be implemented along the lines of magic? The same rules for creating magical spells could apply to creating technology.
Pretty sure there is no rule for magical spells as they are now streamlined and magicians , etc its just a normal unit now, in all I am not sure how would be possible to implement technology, and think the no tech development is fine.
That was what I was thinking, swap out mages for cannon and steamtanks.
I don't like the idea of major advancements of technology. For one, the turns are by seasons, and I am expecting that this game will not several hundred turns (sorry bishop, this is just my experience). I also personally prefer medieval over technology.
yep its more fun XD, plus when designing something like a tech system one have to be very careful
I personally liked the idea of Technology vs magic vs physical ability.
You can have Super strong idiotic club wielding Orcs, Humans who can summon the elements but are quite frail, or Gnomes who are very weak but can use zeppelins and gunpowder. Or a mix of the two like humans who can use Arcane Guns.
You can have Super strong idiotic club wielding Orcs, Humans who can summon the elements but are quite frail, or Gnomes who are very weak but can use zeppelins and gunpowder. Or a mix of the two like humans who can use Arcane Guns.
Well, the beauty about using some generic traits to customize, and then allow the player to decide the flavour, would be how things were kept balanced.
So a ranged unit with extra attack power could a group of powerful, yet frail wizards. Or specialist archers. Or maybe dwarves with heavy crossbows. Or perhaps it is a bunch of soldiers using guns. It could also be a unit of lizardfolk using poisoned blowguns. Perhaps primitives using boomerangs or throwing spears. Hobbits using slings. Giants throwing heavy rocks. There are kinda endless possibilities.
The thing is that in pure stats, it would be the same unit, but each player could add their own touch to each unit type, in order to make it fit with their nation.
Adding a technology tree will make things too complicated, and I would prefer to keep it limited to modifier upgrades to unit attack and defense, with the player explaining what exactly the upgrade is an their orders and IC.
I too, prefer a medieval setting as opposed to steampunk. However, I don't want players to feel they are limited by my preference and should feel free to crossover into the realm of technology to an extent. Is the mage unit a troop of fire wielding mages, or a troop wielding archaic flamethrowers? The choice is yours. After all, the unit names will mainly be a point of reference for the GMs but what they could be, is up to you, so long as they are a near equivalent.
If we were to implement Fingon's idea of evolving Rheagonn from a medieval setting to a steampunk, I am inclined to agree with Jeeshadow, and make it static. If the game were to become stagnant and suffer from player resignations, we could shift ahead in time and continue on with a new cast of characters and write exciting new stories in a new setting. This could serve to give the game a shot in the arm if it is needed.
Otherwise, if we had a consensus of players willing to evolve to a full fledged Victorian-esque Steampunk setting, with all the tech that it would entail, we could make it more organic, slowly making discoveries over time that would push our kingdoms to a new reality, like Groogy's suggestion. However, I would only consider this if all players agreed to it, and speaking for myself, I would like to keep the game at a medieval setting for a while before we explored that option.
If you can't wait, then please feel free to incorporate some elements of a steampunk civ into your kingdom, bearing in mind that it would have to be in an archaic form to keep your lore from being too OP. Sorry, no air ships and rifles... yet.
I too, prefer a medieval setting as opposed to steampunk. However, I don't want players to feel they are limited by my preference and should feel free to crossover into the realm of technology to an extent. Is the mage unit a troop of fire wielding mages, or a troop wielding archaic flamethrowers? The choice is yours. After all, the unit names will mainly be a point of reference for the GMs but what they could be, is up to you, so long as they are a near equivalent.
If we were to implement Fingon's idea of evolving Rheagonn from a medieval setting to a steampunk, I am inclined to agree with Jeeshadow, and make it static. If the game were to become stagnant and suffer from player resignations, we could shift ahead in time and continue on with a new cast of characters and write exciting new stories in a new setting. This could serve to give the game a shot in the arm if it is needed.
Otherwise, if we had a consensus of players willing to evolve to a full fledged Victorian-esque Steampunk setting, with all the tech that it would entail, we could make it more organic, slowly making discoveries over time that would push our kingdoms to a new reality, like Groogy's suggestion. However, I would only consider this if all players agreed to it, and speaking for myself, I would like to keep the game at a medieval setting for a while before we explored that option.
If you can't wait, then please feel free to incorporate some elements of a steampunk civ into your kingdom, bearing in mind that it would have to be in an archaic form to keep your lore from being too OP. Sorry, no air ships and rifles... yet.
Concerning Race/Civ Traits...
In Kingdoms of Rheagonn players will be free to craft a race and civilization that shall only be limited by their imaginations. With a desire to create races and civilizations, there will also be a trait that players can create to supplement their stats to coincide with their kingdom. Unlike the ruler trait, the civ trait will be permanent and optional.
A civ trait will have a bonus attributed to it, as well as a negative. To steer players into a playstyle befitting of their race, the negative trait will outweigh the positive.
For example, a race of seafarers with a bonus to defense and attack to naval units, but a negative to land units. A suitable playstyle would be dominating their opponents at sea, but rarely risk a land invasion.
A productive race with cheap unit cost at the expense of unit attack and defense. A suitable playstyle would be to overwhelm their enemies with sheer numbers.
Civ traits will be created by the player to fit their race, and submitted to Groogy and I for approval. Again, it is optional for those that would rather be well rounded kingdoms such as myself, but for those of you whose race would adhere to a certain mode of operation within Rheagonn, a civ trait can be created to give you an edge when playing your strengths, and a deterrent from playing against the grain of your civilization.
In Kingdoms of Rheagonn players will be free to craft a race and civilization that shall only be limited by their imaginations. With a desire to create races and civilizations, there will also be a trait that players can create to supplement their stats to coincide with their kingdom. Unlike the ruler trait, the civ trait will be permanent and optional.
A civ trait will have a bonus attributed to it, as well as a negative. To steer players into a playstyle befitting of their race, the negative trait will outweigh the positive.
For example, a race of seafarers with a bonus to defense and attack to naval units, but a negative to land units. A suitable playstyle would be dominating their opponents at sea, but rarely risk a land invasion.
A productive race with cheap unit cost at the expense of unit attack and defense. A suitable playstyle would be to overwhelm their enemies with sheer numbers.
Civ traits will be created by the player to fit their race, and submitted to Groogy and I for approval. Again, it is optional for those that would rather be well rounded kingdoms such as myself, but for those of you whose race would adhere to a certain mode of operation within Rheagonn, a civ trait can be created to give you an edge when playing your strengths, and a deterrent from playing against the grain of your civilization.
Concerning Resignations...
Its inevitable. Life happens. Players will grow tired and leave the world of Rheagonn leaving behind an empty vacuum where their kingdom once stood. So how do we fill this gap?
We could fill it with new players, but that would mean they would miss out on crafting their own lore, and be stuck with bridging the existing lore by the retired player. Plus, I'd sooner create a new continent and let players start fresh rather than inhibit them by starting off on the coattails of another player.
Or...
We could extinguish the former kingdom with a natural disaster of epic proportions that will see the land sink into the ocean. I, of course, am keen on this idea.
Players will be free to have allies sub for their orders should they be unable to play, so hopefully resignations will be minimal. I'd hate to sink a kingdom, I really would.
Its inevitable. Life happens. Players will grow tired and leave the world of Rheagonn leaving behind an empty vacuum where their kingdom once stood. So how do we fill this gap?
We could fill it with new players, but that would mean they would miss out on crafting their own lore, and be stuck with bridging the existing lore by the retired player. Plus, I'd sooner create a new continent and let players start fresh rather than inhibit them by starting off on the coattails of another player.
Or...
We could extinguish the former kingdom with a natural disaster of epic proportions that will see the land sink into the ocean. I, of course, am keen on this idea.
Players will be free to have allies sub for their orders should they be unable to play, so hopefully resignations will be minimal. I'd hate to sink a kingdom, I really would.
Groogy and I are leaning on limiting player orders to two actions per turn. This shall keep things manageable for the GMs as well as foster strategic thinking among the players. By allowing only two actions per turn, or season, each player will be more focused upon the direction in which they wish to take their kingdom.
Possible Actions
Not only will positioning armies be vital to the success of your kingdom, but also building improvements in your domain. Purchasing upgrades to add modifiers to your unit stats will always be an option, but the real power will be in major builds throughout your holds, and even beyond.
Camp
A camp will be the base building for what could eventually be upgraded to a castle. They are cheap to build and only take a season to construct, but offer little in way of support for your kingdom. A player is limited to three camps within their kingdom and one camp per foreign realm.
Fortified Camp
Fortifying your camp to include palisade walls, pitfalls, watchtowers and a keep is a time consuming process as well as expensive. However, units positioned here will receive a bonus to defense. Forts also have a potential to project power throughout a realm in a desired area. Upon construction of a fort, a player must state the forts function - Military, Espionage, or Trade. Depending on the function, your fort will offer a modifier to that particular stat for your kingdom. Trade forts built in a foreign kingdom will also yield a small bonus to the host kingdom as well.
Castle
Upgrading a fort into a castle is a long and arduous process that demands patience and wealth. The outcome, is a fortified position that offers great protection to units stationed there as well as a greater modifier to your desired function. Upon completing a castle, a player may once again select a function, or keep it the same as when the site was a fort. Once you make that selection, however, changing the function will come with a cost.
Trade Capital
Constructing a trade capital within your hold, though expensive and time consuming, is well worth the effect of an economic boost to your tax income. Your stewards will work tirelessly to bring in desired goods from abroad as well as fetch a high price for your exports. Players may only have one trade capital per kingdom.
Grand Harbour
Constructing a grand harbour will yield a greater economic modifier to your ports across your kingdom. By constructing greater numbers of trade ships to precipitate trade across your realm and beyond, the grand harbour will be essential in positioning your kingdom as the economic masters of the sea.
That's all I have for major builds so far. Keep in mind that minor builds and upgrades will be at the player's discretion to offer smaller boosts to unit strength, attack, and defense as well as economic modifiers.
Last edited:
Rheagonn, A Growing World...
In Rheagonn , players can sign up without having to burden themselves with learning any pre-existing lore. Instead, new players can start fresh on a new continent isolated from the rest of the established kingdoms. The result is a game that is less intimidating for prospective players as they can jump in at any time, able to craft their own stories. Provided that Groogy and I are not over encumbered by the number of players, I can create a new continent to add to the world and populate it with the new player's kingdoms. If Groogy and I find we are content with the current cap of players, we could enlist another GM to support an even bigger game world.
In Rheagonn , players can sign up without having to burden themselves with learning any pre-existing lore. Instead, new players can start fresh on a new continent isolated from the rest of the established kingdoms. The result is a game that is less intimidating for prospective players as they can jump in at any time, able to craft their own stories. Provided that Groogy and I are not over encumbered by the number of players, I can create a new continent to add to the world and populate it with the new player's kingdoms. If Groogy and I find we are content with the current cap of players, we could enlist another GM to support an even bigger game world.
Possible Military Actions
Groogy's hard work with the numbercruncher has taken what would be a simplistic and probably boring game and turned it into something that remains simple, yet adds a layer of depth that promises to make the game strategic and exciting. Thanks to Groogy's efforts, we can now think of adding some depth to military actions rather then just saying 'attack that'.
Battles
Two armies clashing on the field of battle is now more then just a matter of who has more units. Now with different unit types, the attack points and defense points of the units will now change the shape of war. Players with greater modifiers in att and def will now have the ability to survive prolonged conflicts and have greater war stamina. The result should be more exciting battles.
Raids
Why risk your loyal troops in a deadly siege of an enemy city when one can simply block the roads and cripple that city's economy? Potentially we could have armies conducting raids upon holds and as long as they are operating, they will earn a income modifier for their kingdom, while giving their enemy a negative modifier.
Naval Blockades
Ports will be a major source of income for your kingdom, and should you leave your ports vulnerable, you risk an enemy fleet blockading your shipping lanes. Like the raid, blockades would serve to attach a negative income modifier to the victims income and a positive to the aggressor. Difference being, a naval blockade would effectively earn a - 100% port income for the owner of the blocked port.!
Siege
Of course, one can throw caution to the wind and attempt to fly the banner of their kingdom over the bastions of an enemy hold. By conquering all 6 of an enemy holds they will effectively turn the former king into a vassal, that is unless their enemy chooses exile instead, in that case they can attempt to regain their holds until their armies are destroyed or they are bankrupted.
That's all I got so far. Any thoughts?
Groogy's hard work with the numbercruncher has taken what would be a simplistic and probably boring game and turned it into something that remains simple, yet adds a layer of depth that promises to make the game strategic and exciting. Thanks to Groogy's efforts, we can now think of adding some depth to military actions rather then just saying 'attack that'.
Battles
Two armies clashing on the field of battle is now more then just a matter of who has more units. Now with different unit types, the attack points and defense points of the units will now change the shape of war. Players with greater modifiers in att and def will now have the ability to survive prolonged conflicts and have greater war stamina. The result should be more exciting battles.
Raids
Why risk your loyal troops in a deadly siege of an enemy city when one can simply block the roads and cripple that city's economy? Potentially we could have armies conducting raids upon holds and as long as they are operating, they will earn a income modifier for their kingdom, while giving their enemy a negative modifier.
Naval Blockades
Ports will be a major source of income for your kingdom, and should you leave your ports vulnerable, you risk an enemy fleet blockading your shipping lanes. Like the raid, blockades would serve to attach a negative income modifier to the victims income and a positive to the aggressor. Difference being, a naval blockade would effectively earn a - 100% port income for the owner of the blocked port.!
Siege
Of course, one can throw caution to the wind and attempt to fly the banner of their kingdom over the bastions of an enemy hold. By conquering all 6 of an enemy holds they will effectively turn the former king into a vassal, that is unless their enemy chooses exile instead, in that case they can attempt to regain their holds until their armies are destroyed or they are bankrupted.
That's all I got so far. Any thoughts?
Does the three camps limit apply only to camps, or to all types of holds, or to all types of military hold?
The three camp limit will only apply to camps, with no limit on a particular function. So if a player wants to be a military powerhouse, they may build three camps/forts/castles/ with military functions for a superior modifier to their unit stats. Holds, on the other hand, will have a cap of 6.
Building in foreign kingdoms will have a limit of one per kingdom, this way the function of the camp will set the tone for the diplomatic actions against that kingdom.
Would anyone be interested in some cooperation in order to create a polytheistic pantheon (similar to ancient Greece/Rome). I know there are Muslims/Monotheistic faith already, but that one does not fit with my own race.